But no, if it isn't 100% perfect you have decided it is worthless.
Your summary of their position is so bad I've flagged your comment: "if it isn't 100% perfect you have decided it is worthless."
You are very extreme, and people like you are exactly why many people take a polarizing view on the other end of the spectrum.
This is a nice video on polarization:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc
My own estimate is that the vaccine is about 50% effective for delta. That's cuts R0 in half, which is huge, but not something you can in any way, shape, or form rely on in isolation. It will likely be even lower for future mutations. Aside from the antivaxer movement, another outcome of extreme pro-vaccine stances, to the level of people lying, is that many people take NO precautions once vaccinated. That's a lot of what's driving some (not all) of the current delta outbreaks.
And on the anti-vaxxer side, once scientists get caught fabricating data, they're not going to be trusted even when they're right.
"COVID-19 vaccines reduce the risk of people spreading the virus that causes COVID-19."
[1]https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/keythings...
Because an acknowledgement that fully vaccinated people can spread Delta is not a refutation to the claim that it reduces the spread.
Even the paragraph you quoted says "However, like prior variants, the amount of viral genetic material may go down faster in fully vaccinated people when compared to unvaccinated people. This means fully vaccinated people will likely spread the virus for less time than unvaccinated people."
It says:
* Vaccinated people are leas likely to get COVID, even with the Delta variant.
* Vaccinated people who do get breakthrough infections remain infectious for a shorter time than unvaccinated, even with Delta
It does note that vaccinated people with breakthrough infections can spread Delta, but that is not the same as “just as much as the unvaccinated”.